Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

_________________________
"I'm still an idiot and I'm still in love" - Blue Sofa - The Plugz 1981 (Tito Larriva) Disclosure : I am professionally associated with Arturia but my sentiments are my own only.

_________________________
"I'm still an idiot and I'm still in love" - Blue Sofa - The Plugz 1981 (Tito Larriva) Disclosure : I am professionally associated with Arturia but my sentiments are my own only.

This looks interesting indeed! If the price is right as Dr. Popper has suggested (street $750),I might pick one up when they're available. Just have to hold out for NAMM and see if Yamaha does something similar with a lighter more compact CP5 update.

I reckon this will be a very popular little piano, but I think that Roland have shot themselves in the foot by not including a MIDI in socket. There must be loads of keyboard players with 88 note synths or master keyboards who would welcome an inexpensive way to add Roland's Supernatural piano sound to their setup. This would have fitted the bill nicely for a lot of people, but you can't play it from another MIDI instrument - D'oh!

Why did they throw all the controls on the left side of the keys, adding another eight inches of length to the board? That works against the purpose of going down to 64 keys.

That said, I'm interested in trying this. It may still be marginally better for traveling than a PX-x50.

.

Thats a good point- you could fit 8-9 more keys in that space. They could have made this 88 keys easily though. It still would have been light.

(insert sarcasim here Possum) On the other hand, they have been reading the numerous posts on this board clamoring for the first ever 64 note weighted keyboard.

My point is the opposite -- by putting the controls across the top, they could have ended up with the first truly portable, piano-like DP.

It's hard to see how this is any more portable than my PX-350, but I'll wait for specs to reach a firm conclusion on that point.

By my back-of-the envelope reckoning, the decision to put the controls on the left adds about six seemingly unnecessary inches to the width of the board (if you think about it as a missed opportunity for enhancing portability by running the controls across the top). Looking at it as Possum PX130 does, it takes away 10 or 11 keys that could otherwise have been included in the same package.

ON THE OTHER HAND, the only other "travel piano" in the ballpark (to my knowledge) is the NP-11. The NP-11 is great for what it is, but that isn't a lot. Unweighted keys, few (if any) usable sounds, little polyphony, etc., etc., etc.

Again, by my rough, back-of-the envelope reckoning, this Roland should be only an inch or two wider than the NP-11 and will offer LOTS more to the serious player. (The NP-11 has 61 keys, but it has speakers at either end of the keyboard, adding more width than the Roland controls.)

In other words, while I'd love for this instrument to be as portable as it could be (or to offer more keys on the same chassis), it may still be a vast improvement on anything else in that niche.

I'm getting interested again, and I look forward to seeing specs and the beast itself.

64 keys clearly isn't geared for the classical player, but I think this is a great option for gigging players. I like the controls to the left where you can access them with the left hand without getting in the way.

64 keys clearly isn't geared for the classical player, but I think this is a great option for gigging players. I like the controls to the left where you can access them with the left hand without getting in the way.

I see your point. From a gigging pianist's perspective, the control setup is a plus.

I am a classical player (mostly), and I'm looking at this strictly from the perspective of someone who would love to have a decent and portable travel piano on which to practice when the real thing isn't available. That's why I wish they'd saved (or used) the space on the left by not putting controls there.

Maybe they were finally able to knock a bit of sense into their dopy joystick real estate department, but too late to actually put something useful (like, oh I don't know, keys maybe?) down there instead.

I agree that controls on the left eliminates some of the "advantage" of having a 64-key weighted board, but it was presumably pre-determined by the design of the A-88 from which it looks to have been physically derived.

Maybe they were finally able to knock a bit of sense into their dopy joystick real estate department, but too late to actually put something useful (like, oh I don't know, keys maybe?) down there instead.

I like the bass end like a real piano, needs 76 keys though.

Roland's controller setups are some of the best I've used. These aren't really being built with the piano player in mind. They are geared toward keyboard players who need the controls to be in a practical place that is accessible while playing. I don't like it when modulation controls are placed on top of the keybed.

I agree that controls on the left eliminates some of the "advantage" of having a 64-key weighted board, but it was presumably pre-determined by the design of the A-88 from which it looks to have been physically derived.

If that's right (as it seems to be), the elimination of 14 white keys from the A-88 chassis should make the width of this new Roland about 44 inches. Here are the specs on the A-88:

I can see one of these on the bottom tier, with the new VR-09 organ on the top tier being a popular gigging rig. Between the two of them you have all the bread and butter requirements for a cover band.

Sixty four keys with A at the bottom? I think I can see why. Hit the octave shift button on the panel and you have the same familiar array as on a piano. The lowest C, Eflat , G are right where you expect them to be.

Interesting product; but being longer than necessary and thus exceeding the ATA limit of 62 inches (when put into a travel case), as well as starting on A instead of F, make this a deal-breaker for me.

I am on my third Roland (FP-7F), and would really love to see them make a truly travel-friendly keyboard with weighted keys and a classically oriented 5-octave compass (F-F). If they had repositioned the controls to the top, they could have accommodated a few more keys (F-C, 68 keys) and still keep it short enough to fit into an ATA case smaller than 62 total inches.

Sixty four keys with A at the bottom? I think I can see why. Hit the octave shift button on the panel and you have the same familiar array as on a piano. The lowest C, Eflat , G are right where you expect them to be.

Yes, with octave shift, at the bottom, it exactly matches the bottom of a piano (A), and at the top, it exactly matches the top of a piano (C). It's also the same span as the Wurlitzer electric piano. The 76 (+1) key VAX is also basically A to C. It means that every note of the piano's 88 is available within two octave settings. Any other set of 76 notes would require three settings to cover all 88 keys. Likewise with the Roland, you can go up or down an octave from standard, and reach all 88 notes. Anything other than A-to-C, you would need a fourth octave setting to reach the last notes.